Friday, November 13, 2015

Other news from the House of Lords - 2

Meanwhile, Lord Pearson of Rannoch is conducting his own campaign, which consists of two aspects: firstly, it is time we started talking about Islam seriously and without fear and, secondly, the moderate or anti-extremist Muslims should be drawn into that discussion. The campaign has not advanced very far as yet but it is moving forward slowly.

On November 5 (one wonders whether the powers that be recognized the appropriateness of the date) the noble Lord had a Starred Question:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, as part of their counter-extremism strategy, they will encourage a national debate about the nature of Islam, including whether the Muslim tenet of abrogation remains valid today.
Sadly, I have to report that the brief debate that followed the Question was not on a particularly high level, consisting largely of statements disguised as questions about how shocking and divisive such a suggestion might be.

While this blog agrees with the notion that the state has no place in organizing religious debates and discussions, the Question refers to "encouragement" rather than "organization". There are many debates going on about major and not so major religions and nobody thinks that they are divisive. Why exactly should Islam be excluded?

As to why it might be a good idea to include such a debate or discussion in the "counter-extremism strategy", it would be hard to deny that the terrorist threat we face at the moment is tied in with certain groups in the Muslim community. For that very reason the many other Muslims should have a chance to take part in such a discussion and distance themselves from the extremists, their supporters and propagandists and not just the terrorists.

As it happens, I do know that there are many Muslims in this country who are actively fighting the good fight and they are not given nearly as much support either by HMG or by the media, especially not the BBC, though they are often in real danger.

Lord Pearson has also, with the help of a couple of experts on the subject, produced a paper, entitled Shall We Talk About Islam?, which, I am assured by his office, will be on-line very soon. As soon as that happens, this blog will link to it. In the meantime, let me quote the introductory paragraphs:
Have you noticed that when we try to discuss Islam, we are immediately accused of stirring up religious hatred or of being Islamophobic bigots etc? But we can say what we like about any other religion?

We are surprised by how little our friends and acquaintances know about Islam, which contains perhaps the greatest threat facing our Judaeo-Christian civilization.

So here is a memo on some of the basic facts about Islam. It may be controversial, but we hope it will encourage a long overdue national debate.
What follows is a number of points about Islam and the Qur'an, with references to the accepted texts.

The memo has been sent to members of the House of Lords and to Opinion Formers with a suggestion to the Guardian newspaper, in particular, given their previous attacks on Lord Pearson that they preside over a serious debate. It does not have to be the Grauniad. Any other media outlet could do it.


  1. "which contains perhaps the greatest threat facing our Judaeo-Christian civilization."

    There isn't really such a thing as Judaeo-Christian civilization. They're two different animals. Conflating the two is demeaning to both Judaism and Christianity. European civilisation was historically a Christian civilisation.

    I'm not knocking Jews, just pointing out that Lord Pearson is ignoring the vast differences between two entirely different religions and cultural traditions.

    1. I think you might also be ignoring vast areas in which the two are similar. I am not knocking Jews either.

    2. There are vast areas in which they are similar. There are also vast areas in which Christianity and Islam are similar but no-one would speak of Islamo-Christian civilisation. There are similarities, but also profound differences.

      To me the "Judeo-Christian" concept is a sign of our lack of confidence in Christian civilisation. It's like apologising for Christianity.

    3. Given how long that expression has existed I really do not think that acknowledgement of Christianity's Judaeic roots is an apology for it.

    4. Surely the focus should be the threat to civilisation not semantics about Christianity or Judaism

  2. Did you know you can shorten your long urls with Shortest and get cash for every visitor to your shortened urls.